It is almost exactly ten years since the last Save The Pool campaign.
The 2015 Save The Pool Campaigners have set up a pop-up pool outside the Community Shop in Bury Street to demonstrate the alternative if the Open Air Pool were to be filled in. They say the only way of keeping the pool, which first opened in 1952, is if people choose Option A after going to the Community Shop or http://tinyurl.com/AbbeyMeadow.
Inside the Community Shop the Abbey Meadow development options are outlined: Option A (Pool +), Option B (Cafe +) and Option C (Variety), and there are experts on hand from VWHDC (Vale of White Horse District Council) to answer questions.
Refurbishing the pool and making it structurally sound for the future could cost around £250K – so about half the budget. Refurbishing the changing area will take another £150K. But people could choose to get the pool done and not the changing area – perhaps improve the kiosk and add some seating instead.
Similarly the Cafe will take up a lot of the budget as it will be in an area prone to flooding. Having taken advice VWHDC did not think an operator would be interested in financing the building stage, but once built, operators would be willing to run the cafe.
None of the options include improving the Sustrans cycleway to make for better dual cycle and pedestrian use, but Option C could take some pedestrians onto additional nature walks. None of the options appear to keep the pitch and putt either.
I gathered that VWHDC hope to get a clear mandate from this consultation.
I cannot believe they could even think about shutting the pool again. All that was said 10 years ago still applies today. It is a valuable asset, the envy of many, in the perfect setting. I would urge everyone to vote for option A.
The man I spoke to in the community shop was certainly not an expert – told me he knew nothing about the cost, planning issues etc of the options and was just giving out booklets.
And the one thing I’d like above everything else is the Pitch & Putt and a proper Crazy Golf (that should have been re-vamped 20 years ago). OK, that’s 2 thinghs, but I’d rather keep the status quo than see them go.
I’ve had kids around 20 years and never been able to have the fun of Crazy Golf with them in their home town (the current one always gets stuck on the edge, so its no fun and you never go back again).
This is the community shop that was initially advertised by the VOWH DC as being open for people to pop in for 6 days including this coming Saturday but suddenly got changed to just this Mon & Tues meaning most working people won’t get to call in if they wanted to. The consultation was shocking & now the publicising of the voting is shocking unless you happen to be on social media. The feedback from people attending the community shop today was poor, the slant is the pool is too expensive but a restaurant would benefit the community. Only 1300 people have voted. I’m pretty disgusted by the VOWH DC! I just hope the local community rely together & save the pool.
Is there any way (short of outright revolt) to get Abingdon out of the clutches of the ABOMINABLE VOWH DC, ??? Seems to me that body constantly is coming up with schemes to bilk this town !!
This annual drama has been going on since I was a teenager (c.40 years). The pool is a great asset to the town. Why not invest in it with a retractable roof & folding glass doors, making it available 52 weeks of the year? The new pool in Audlett Drive has proved the need for good facilities. The Old Gaol pool was always inadequate. The population of Abingdon has swelled since the 1970’s & it is a popular tourist destination. The more the place is available then the more credible a facility it can be.
I’m assuming that were the swimming pool to go then the cost of demolishing it and then landscaping would make large inroads into the Vale’s largesse of £500K thus leaving less of a pittance to spend on the alternatives. It would, of course, suit the Vale to lose the swimming pool, as it disposed of The Guildhall, as it’s a cost centre and the Vale’s mission is to loot Abingdon and throw a few crumbs back.
Recently, there was a large consultancy document re. reducing the number of councils in Oxfordshire. This would dispense with the Vale council and others. There’s been a deafening silence on this document, though the idea isn’t entirely unsupported:
http://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/archive/2014/07/03/11315962.What_MPs_and_council_chiefs_think_of_county___s_unitary_bid/
Though Matthew Barber is quoted:
‘Matthew Barber, Vale of White Horse District Council leader: I think it is a non-event. This government has said there will be no reorganisation in this Parliament and I don’t see any appetite for it in the next Parliament.’
I wouldn’t expect him to be the first turkey to vote for Christmas ;0)
If you think it might be an idea to get rid of the Vale/District Council layer of government I’d suggest that you read the above article as it might give you some idea of the political party to vote against in the forthcoming election.
What we can’t really afford is a whole load of ‘jobs for the boys’ screwing-up this town. We need competent people and not politicians (of any allegiance) running the Town’s affairs.
Carl and Kate – the County Council is currently looking at options around unitary authority which would change the council system from a three tier system to a two tier version, in effect removing the district authority tier. I haven’t heard much about progress recently but the link below talks about what they are considering. It mainly focuses on the financial benefits, but there are also potential benefits around moving more locally specific services to the parish councils (in Abingdon’s case that would be the town council)
https://www.oxfordshire.gov.uk/cms/news/2015/jan/one-council-oxfordshire-could-reduce-council-tax-and-increase-investment-roads
sorry for repetition – posts crossed in the ether.
Looks like we’ve finally found something we agree on Bill 😉
I think Kelly (post 1) must have been unlucky – the people in there this afternoon were much better informed and able to answer my questions about costs of various elements.
I think the issue is more complex than some of the discussion (not just here) implies. If just sprucing up the pool and changing-rooms takes up virtuallly all of the money available will that give us a facility that will be better-used than at present – something like the Hinksey pool which i am told is wonderful? To do that will probably require a more imaginative approach to opening times – and possibly willingness to spend more on heating the pool. Will there be a proper baby pool? If the answers to those questions are “No” we will land up with a pool which doesnt really meet 21st century expectations and the other facilities will still be as tired and under-used as at present.
If the answer is yes – do we have to assume that the uprades to the rest of the area will never happen? Rather than seeing these as alternatives, why not make provision for a progressive scheme to upgrade the whole area over, say, the lifetime of the next Council? And why not harness some of the Community interest generated by this exercise to set up some form of joint working to make the area better?
Why not use the free power from the Hydro project a few meters upstream to heat the pool making it more economically viable. It’s Abingdon’s water.
I asked about solar panels to help run the pool this afternoon and was told they would be too expensive – though I am not so sure of that nowadays as they are a lot cheaper than they were.
However, I was also told that upgrading the pool and pump etc. would take half the money and upgrading the changing rooms to the standard people would like would take most of the rest. Then there would be the problem of running and heating the pool.
So as Hester says, with only £500,000 to spend we would only get a new swimming pool and almost nothing else – perhaps a few seats and picnic tables.
The officer said that the cafe (which would be higher than last year’s floods if it is situated near the site of the changing rooms) might take about £350,000 to build, but it would generate an income of £20,000 per year which could be used for some of the things which have been left out (if the DC doesn’t swallow it up!)
The playground for younger children is very popular and well used. Perhaps we should be willing to support a more adventurous playground and a sports area for the older ones.
Those figures seem astronomical. Perhaps we should think back to when Abingdon Bridge was built – all done voluntarily by the local people.
I remember when there were only 2 tiers of local government – Oxfordshire CC for major issues – schools, roads etc and Abingdon Borough Council for all local responsibility, including amenities and planning ( with the rural district council working alongside for the surrounding villages). This worked much better, they had their own budgets with local councillors to decide on them. and at the time the changes were predicted to be expensive, unsuitable for local decisions etc. Interesting that there is a move to change back to 2 tiers. Why on earth should people in towns miles away be able to make decisions on Abingdon amenities such as the pool.
If you research into other open air pools/lidos you will see that they have obtained grants, for example an outdoor pool was recently awarded £75,000 from Sports England, another was awarded money from the Lottery Fund. Several councils who originally closed their outdoor pools are now spending money on getting them reopened . This is something the VOWH DC could easily look into but that’s clearly too much effort. Its sad that people would rather a cafe built on the Abbey then have the pool. The pool could be so much better run, be open longer, have events & private hire. I think eventually if the pool closes people will choose to go to other places where they have a pool. This will just be like the current situation with the shops. Our council is so short sighted!
Why this obsession with a cafe The Meadow is an area for open air pleasure and relaxation with the children. There were plenty of people there yesterday doing just that, then perhaps, walking back into Town for a coffee.
The money should be spent, if money there be, on bringing the Meadows existing facilities to a standard expected in the 21st century. If they need an example, look no further than Hinksey Park off the Abingdon Road in Oxford.
Why is yet another cafe/restaurant even being considered, especially at the expense of a valuable sports facility (the pool)?
Besides, aren’t we still waiting for the riverside restaurants promised as part of the Old Goal development??
The consultation process has been abysmal. I took a ‘straw poll’ at a couple of gatherings I attended recently. The majority had not even heard of the plans let alone the consultation process. For something as important as this surely all of the households should have been contacted. Not difficult….. Leaflets delivered or Schools given information, adverts in the local free press, notices etc etc.
Why only £500k discussed? When Matthew Barber was on BBC Radio Oxford at the weekend I could have sworn he said at least £500k (or did I imagine that?) and then later in the interview he came back to refer to £500k “for this year”. I don’t think I imagined that!
You know what? The Vale Council have significantly more capital available than £500k. If we all cooperate and talk to the councillors and to each other and work together then even a Loch Ness Monster can appreciate that the Abbey Meadow can be improved in many ways, with a pool fit for the 21st century, with a cover to retain the heat at night so the water can be warmer and cleaner, with decent changing rooms and so on.
And still the money won’t have run out.
Cassandra at 14 Almost 10,000 flyers have been delivered or handed out by the Friends of the outdoor pool. Our experience in the town centre is that by now the vast majority of the public have heard of the consultation. It has taken a lot of effort to get it in the press and online, but there are articles and letters in every local paper, it has been on Radio Oxford, there is interest by one of the loa a, TV companies. So it can’t be said that only those with access to social media have discovered this.
By the way we spent almost £130 from our own pockets to fund this distribution and we have had help in delivering to households and each of us has spent many hours in the town centre engaging with the public and distributing fliers.
Our website at http://www.saveourpool.org.uk leads to all the information, including all the council documents.
Seen the options yourself, they seem to be tick lists (you put the list in order 1st to last), Section for no pool, open air ‘arena’, includes decisions, upgrade the play area, Adventure playground for 10 years above, nature trails, splash pool upgrade, Open air ‘Arena’/venue.
The most ‘popular’ choice of A/B or C, is then put into an average order of ‘popularity’. I suppose they will then say peoples choice.
Re the swimming pool, with the lowest budget available, seems they can upgrade the pool OR the changing rooms, so could end up with state of the art pool, below grade changing areas. Will it still be a seasonal pool??, only available limited time, warm seasons??
Peter@16.
I was not criticising the sterling efforts made by the Friends of the outdoor pool…far from it. I know that it has been an active group.
I was referring the situation whereby the Vale intends to spend £500k of our funds on what might be quite radical changes to a public facility (the Abbey Gardens) and yet has not really entered into a thorough consultation process with the whole town.
for the adults, there is Nature Trails, Outdoor Gym, they seem to have all bases covered, Young children, ‘youf’, and adults, mixed choices, (approx 12 boxes to be put 1st to last) in the ‘no pool’ update the whole area.
The outdoor ‘arena/venue’ would be used to create revenue, as with The ‘eatery’ option. This seems to vary, Cafe or Restaurant is not clear, although what is clear is revenue producer….for the upgrade/modernisation of the area as tastes change.
I mean zip wires/climbing walls or Outdoor Gym. (What is a modern adventure playground?-I remember in Brixton Hill on a limited budget, they used recycled wood etc, and a small group built the Adventure Playground for the youf. Maybe a venue for Internet Gaming would be more appropriate?.
Feels like council have tried to rush this consultation through, apparently the shop in town was due to be open for 7 days but somehow they decide 2 days mid-week in office hours was enough. Seems to be a lot of people of Abingdon shocked about the possibility of losing the pool, We don’t need another restaurant, plenty of hard working business in this sector paying business rates to the Vale already
just been on the consultation to give my tupence worth.
Frankly, what a farce this all is. I had hoped for more from the Vale… Unfortunately it seems they have their own agenda, but need to pay lip-service to us by ‘asking us’, in a shamefully poor way.
I want the pool…and somewhere to play…but also somewhere to ‘relax and unwind’. It seems, the Vale is unable to even consider both!
On their questionnaire….they can’t even get the spellings right! If they are that slapdash when it comes to the questionnaire…what hope is there for anything else!!!
Yet again….it is barely worth engaging. Dissatisfaction with this whole process has been the paramount issue that has come to the fore – yet they plough on.
God save us from the ex-sperts.
@ #15 Lochness – any idea which day Matt B was on the radio; and time…I’ll have a listen on “Listen Again”?
Other towns are investing in revitilising their Lidos. They understand that the key is to bring people into the town in the first place. People travel all over to go to Hinksey and Wallingford. Upgrade the pool and it is a draw to the town. Absolutely DON’T provide too much in the way of food services so that people head into town and spend their money at existing businesses which are struggling.
Daniel it was on Radio Oxford on Saturday before 8am and there were odd repeats on a few of the news items that day. I don’t think anything new was said in the repeats.
Hi Daniel. Yup Peter was right and should know because he was on to contest with Matt B. I guess he’s got the time about right too.
Something I found when delving to the depths of this problems as Monsters do, is that 75% are voting To save the pool. But don’t trust a monster, ask at the oracle.
Nessie
If you want to keep the pool, as well as voting you can sign a petition at:
https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/save-abbey-meadows-outdoor-pool-abingdon?source=facebook-share-button&time=1426101365
Thanks Naomi
The pool must remain ! It could do with an upgrade as mentioned above. The Public toilets are a disgrace, and and similar attention. The retention of the pool has to be a priority in any investment plans in this area. I would also add that that the council have been very ineffective in communicating their plans to residents in Abingdon. A simple leaflet drop or inclusion with the council tax bill would have been good ? The display of a sign next to the disgusting toilets is not really very effective, except to those who walk past. Many people only visit this area in warmer weather and by then the deadline has passed. Opening of the ‘shop’ in Bury Precinct for Monday and Tuesday this week meant many working people could not visit. Its too late now …. but you did not miss much. Go online and vote for Option A to ensure we keep the pool, because the other two options scrap the pool.
thanks for the BBC info.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p02ll7hl
at 1h 38mins.
By the sounds of it Matty B is well up for the pool!
*Indeed he DOES say, that it is £500k AT LEAST.
*That it is NOT a one off, but the start of on going investment.
*That they want to update the pool AND the changing facilities.
*They are looking at a 10 year vision.
Although he kept saying that they want to hear what the people of Abingdon want – which is nice….he did say that the pool is overwhelmingly the preferred option.
You could almost be forgiven for thinking that £500 k could sort the pool, this year. A few £k on the mini golf and playground next year. A few £K on the this and the that, the next…. etc…
He also acknowledged the underinvestment in the pool in recent years – but not of course on his watch….
so…we’ll see. In fact, I would go so far as to say…If I trusted him, it all sounds very positive!
Of course….we will see….
How an earth would want a restaurant funded with tax payers money?
I’ll take a renovated pool, better changing rooms and a low key cafe with some tables, decent coffee and a few croissants from pascals
Daniel – for once you sound less cynical than I feel! I suspect ‘Matty B’ has now realised the strength of feeling and is backpedaling fast!
I know of of know reason why the amount of money has been limited to £500K, particularly as no proper financial projections have been produced. In my view a capital investment in bringing the pool and facilities up to scratch would be likely to then reduce the ongoing running costs, freeing up cash that could then be spent improving other facilities in future years.
Other ways to reduce the running costs would be longer opening periods and hours, so as to have many more users; combining the kiosk with the ticket desk, as they do in cinemas; and if (as I hope will happen) the mini-golf and tennis courts are refurbished, selling tickets for those from the same desk. In the past they were managed by separate Vale departments!
Thanks Neil – sometimes my cynicism is so subtle it can get missed – I’ll bear it in mind for the future! I am sure though, that between us, we can actually *be* suitably cynical!
I for one am always banging the drum about the “council” asking us what we want, rather than just doing what they want. How refreshing it is that this is seemingly what they are doing! However…to use an analogy about busses, all coming at once…
“we wait hours for a bus to come, and then 3 come along at once – but they are all going the wrong way!”
Am I supposed to be happy that the busses came?
Even with this issue, there is too much subterfuge, innuendo, shadow talk, hidden meaning and agenda – as witnessed all too many times before by “The Veil” council for us to trust that they are doing the best, or even the right thing for us. It is a shame really.
Still…it is more than likely being driven by those council officers, who are not elected, not accountable and not seen….so why should they be that bothered. Are they even measured on whether this latest hoo-ha is a ‘success’ or not, or again, if it monumentally fails…will they have moved on to the next project anyway?
It pains me to say it…but I simply do not trust “The Veil” to do the right thing for Abingdon.
I couldn’t agree more, Daniel. None of the Vale cabinet live in Abingdon and they are either clueless, or choose to ignore the needs and specific issues facing the Town.
It’s an needlessly expensive stratum of local government which should be disassembled before they have chance to blow more of the ratepayers money on a new palace to replace the Crowmarsh Gifford bonfire.
Neil
Thanks for bringing up the difference between capital costs and running costs. I know its a bit convoluted but if a convoluted Nessy can get his tiny head round it, anyone can.
Thing is the Vale (or Veil?) had spent a bit of capital after the last campaign, then the running costs as you and Hester say would have been lower.
Costs per swimmer would have been REDUCED due to the extra revenue fromoô higher attendance but the costs per swimmer would also have been DILUTED simply because there would have been more swimmers.
There’s a letter in yesterday’s Herald confusing capital and revenue costs. Absolutely monstrous!
Nessy